Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 17:17:55 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> To: "Viren R. Shah" <viren@rstcorp.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 2.2.6 for NFS server Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980225170510.3416E-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> In-Reply-To: <199802251846.NAA05311@rstcorp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, Viren R. Shah wrote: > 1. Is 2.2.6 close enough that we should put off installing 2.2-STABLE > for a few days? Or in other terms, are there enough stability > improvements in 2.2.6 that we should definitely wait for it. > > 2. I've seen a few mentions of NFS problems on 2.2.5. Are there any > big gotchas wrt using a 2.2.x box as an NFS server? Depends on your clients. For 2.2.5, I can confirm that Solaris and Digital Unix clients do NOT work using nfs v3. Digital Unix works fine if you specify v2 when mounting. Telling FreeBSD mountd to only accept v2 does not seem to allow mounts from Solaris clients using their automounter (I'm not the admin of the Solaris boxes in question so I can't do much more investigation.) In other words: Try it out. The most obvious symptom of the v3 problems with Solaris and Digital Unix are with large directories--listings will be incomplete. For example if you have 200 files in a directory, it may take three or four rm * commands to actually remove everything. I have not been paying much attention to the 2.2.5 to 2.2.6 changes. A fix for this v3 incompatibility would be most welcome (but far beyond my hacking skills). -john To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980225170510.3416E-100000>